Agreed, very impressive performance. 3rd F1 race and already on the podium.joseff wrote:A fine 3rd for Robert Kubica. This guy's really something special.
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
So, if Alonso had slow down in order to let Massa overtake him that wouldn't affect Massa's aerodynamics (+ trajectory)?!theSuit wrote:Just to be fair, I think Max does make a point - the penalty was for 'impeding' not 'blocking' - and if your wake disrupts the aerodynamics of a car behind then you're guilty. And that's something you can only see on the data.
Alonso says Renault still favourites
By Michele Lostia Sunday, September 10th 2006, 14:30 GMT
Fernando Alonso is still confident he can win this year's title despite having seen his lead cut to two points over championship rival Michael Schumacher.
Alonso, who started the race from tenth position after having been relegated from fifth with a controversial decision by the stewards, managed to reach third position with nine laps to go when the engine on his Renault expired.
Schumacher, meanwhile, went on to win the race.
"I think we are strong and we are the favourites," the Spaniard told Italian TV channel RAI. "We're still ahead by two points, let's not forget it. There are many people who want to decide the outcome of the championship differently, but in the end the honest people will win.
"It's not just an unlucky race. It was a bit rigged from the start with an incredible decision and then the engine went: these things happen and it happened today. The championship is getting close, but we must stay calm: we are very strong at the moment and I feel very confident for the last races."
Renault's boss Flavio Briatore, on the other hand, was not as confident as was very critical on Alonso's punishment. "There won't be a fight to the finish [this season]. The championship has already been assigned."
There are still three races to go until the end of the season, with the next one being in China in three week's time.
http://www.f1technical.net/development/
Tp, you are a gentleman. I feel compelled to support your position by stating that, according again to FoxSportsLA, Ferrari did not protest or complain: they only made an observation. This can be dismissed as irrelevant, but the Fox commentators conceded there is a procedural difference: Ferrari did not cried "Hey, what a foul!". They said "Hey, look at this and reach your own conclusions".Tp wrote:... But I can't see why people are blaming Ferrari, all what they did was protest. It was the Stewards' fault to deem the 'incident' illegal.
) but I definitely do not like Briatore too much. This kind of flamboyant, playboyish characters that want to take the world by storm (ehem... sorry, I am maybe going too far) are not good for any sport. Look, for example, at the sad history of the Atlético de Madrid...
). Besides, I am truly intrigued by BMW performance today: what did they do? Kubica, excellent as all the pilots are, must have had a specially-suited-to-the-circuit car today. You do not see every day a car holding a Ferrari for so long. This is one of these days you feel sorry for Ferrari banning the transmision of car-pit radio. 
autosport.com wrote:Doubts over Bridgestone legality quashed
By Jonathan Noble Sunday, September 10th 2006, 18:39 GMT
Renault and Michelin approached the FIA after today's race at Monza with doubts about the legality of Ferrari's Bridgestone tyres, autosport.com has learned, but the French team and tyre maker said they were content with the governing body's explanations.
While the Formula One world was focused on Michael Schumacher's retirement announcement, representatives from Renault and Michelin went to see FIA technical delegate Charlie Whiting with questions about Bridgestone.
Renault's director of engineering Pat Symonds and Michelin's F1 director Nick Shorrock had suspicions that Bridgestone may have treated their tyres with chemicals at events.
Applying chemical spray to tyres could make a tyre super sticky for improved grip over one lap before wearing off to reveal hard rubber that would be better suited for long distances.
Such an action, however, would be in breach of Article 73B of the Formula One sporting regulations that states:
"Each tyre supplier must undertake to provide no more than two specifications of dry-weather tyre to each team at each Event, each of which must be of one homogeneous compound. Any modification or treatment, other than heating, carried out to a tyre or tyres will be considered a change of specification."
According to sources, Symonds and Shorrock's suspicions were raised by a photograph of a Bridgestone tyre engineer that had been obtained by Michelin.
The picture showed an engineer wearing a glove, protective apron and face-mask - the type of gear that would be worn when dealing with chemical spray.
But after speaking to Whiting today, the matter was quickly resolved. It was explained that the engineer was wearing the items to protect himself from chemical rubber particles released into the air when tyres are cut open for post-session internal inspection.
Shorrock said they were content with the explanation.
"We asked some questions about what was happening," he told autosport.com. "We are happy with the explanation, so the situation is settled for now."
"for now" means they will downplay the matter later.Briatore clarifies 'jokey' remarks
By Jonathan Noble Sunday, September 10th 2006, 19:06 GMT
Renault team chief Flavio Briatore has moved to clarify his comments about the integrity of Formula One, the Italian saying these comments were made in jest.
Briatore has been critical of the sport's authorities, saying the world championship is being fixed in favour of Ferrari, further claiming in a post-race interview with Italian television RAI that the recent scandal in Italian football pales in comparison with the situation in F1.
But after the FIA said it was looking into Briatore's comments, with the Italian possibly invited to appear in front of the World Motor Sport Council for bringing the sport into disrepute, Briatore issued a statement that moves to downplay the severity of his accusations.
"These comments, which have been attributed to me in the press today, have been completely taken out of context," Briatore stated. "A jokey remark has been turned into something it was not intended to be.
"I have every confidence in the governance of our sport and look forward to our team fighting and winning the Formula One World Championship this season."
The Formula One Sporting Regulations allow the FIA to punish any competitor who brings in any way the championship into disrepute.
This is true. However (and I hve no FACTS for this so my point isn't factual just a strong hunch) how many times has an act like this gone unoticed in the course of the season so far?manchild wrote:theSuit wrote:Just to be fair, I think Max does make a point - the penalty was for 'impeding' not 'blocking' - and if your wake disrupts the aerodynamics of a car behind then you're guilty. And that's something you can only see on the data.
Because some people believe in fair play and probbably kept protest over frisbies as a plan B in their pocket for more suitable situation.FLC wrote:If Ferrari's "frisbies" are such an efficient aero device, how come Renault havent copied it yet?
Alonso didn't gain position by having excursion over the grass. He already overtook Heidfeld before that happened.FLC wrote:How come nobody said anything about how Alonso passed Heidfeld today? Didnt it remind you of MS's move from Hungary? Some people here went wild about that, what's the difference? That Alonso didnt finish the race? Didnt get an afterwards point?.
That wasn't a trick. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/54436FLC wrote:Pulling out tricks and protests at the last minute has been and will be a part of the game. All the teams use it, and that includes Renault. Flavio said he would try something like that before monza (over the "frisbies") and they tried it again today with the picture of the Bridgestone engineer. You cant cry foul on something you do just like all the rest.?.
They came to Monza after being ujustly punished by FIA by banning of mass damper and Alonos's penalty in Hungary. Than Alonso got another unjust punishment that was seen as such by everyone except FIA and certain percentage of Ferrari fans (not all of them). So I'd say that FIA's and Mosley's behavior has been digusting through the whole weekend as well as it has been digusting whole season and for the previous 14 years. Flavio and Renault are only reacting and defending themselves without wanting anything but equal rules for all participants in F1.FLC wrote:Renault's behavior has been digusting through the whole weekend. When Flavio was bound to stand behind his harsh words and belief he chose to bend over and downplay them as jokes. That shows you of how serious his claims are.
Shuey won't deserve it in any way because he is driving illegal car whole season and got close to Alonso because mad Max helped him by banning mass damper and punishing Alonso twice without any reason. If FIA had any moral Schuey would be out of F1 for good after 1997. His win in Monza was so phatetic and fixed just like biggest part of his career. He is going in style - the style he is recognised by.FLC wrote:Alonso will deserve the title only if he gets it at the end of the season.
You are wrong. Deliberate has nothing to do with impeding in that rule.pRo wrote:Anyone remember the rules? It's not about possibly maybe perhaps impeding someone. It's about deliberately impeding.
(Yes, you could argue whether the deliberately only means stopping or also impeding. There have been dozens of cases where a driver has undeliberately impeded another though, so it must mean both, right?)(A. 116b) If, in the opinion of the stewards, a driver deliberately stops on the circuit or impedes another driver in
any way during the qualifying practice session his times will be cancelled.
I'll also quote what The Official Formula 1 Website said:Massa complained to officials that Alonso had blocked him whilst on his final run at the end of session. The stewards agreed and deleted the Renault star’s three fastest times from Q3, though they did concede that Alonso’s actions may not have been deliberate.
So they are more or less saying that maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but we'll punish him anyway.
